From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Tue Mar 05 2002 - 15:37:14 MST
Simon McClenahan wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "G.P." <gdotpdot@usa.net>
> To: <extropians@extropy.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 12:54 AM
> Subject: Re: David Pizer and his Venturist Society
>
> > I think this may be very smart. Members of religiuos organizations are
> > granted special rights, like refusing to give basic medical care to
> > their children, that others would not have. If we can use this system
> > to facilitate cryonics arrangements, it is good.
> > Normally I would not trust a philosophic system of that chooses to
> > call itself "religious" belief, but perhaps in this case it is a smart
> > and pragmatic move.
>
> But would it be a morally right thing to do, particularly in the ethical
> model of Extropianism? Should the means really justify the end?
If the only way a particular individual can accept extropy/transhumanism
is through a religious framework or dogma, then it is our responsibility
to offer such. For instance, I could easily rewrite the entire Bible
from the viewpoint that 'God' is a nanotechnological civilization of the
'crypto-dirt' variety we've discussed of late. Presenting our ideas as a
necessary scientific framework for a christian's preexisting faith to be
plausible would be a worthwhile feat of memetic engineering.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:47 MST